Suchergebnisse

The route and place in international relations of the Rus campaigns in Tabaristan, which took place in the second half of the 9th – early 10th century, are studied in the paper. Attention is also paid to the issue of the place of those military actions in Rus-Khazars relationships. During the studied period, the Khazar Khaganate remained the leading state in the region. The getting of the Rus to the Caspian Sea was possible only with the consent of the rulers of the Khazar Khaganate. The passage of the Rus into this region is associated with the emergence of the Volga trade route. However, they used this way only from Ladoga to Volga Bulgaria. No reliable sources are telling about the Rus moving along the Volga between Volga Bulgaria and Khazaria during the 9th – 10th centuries. It can be said with high probability that the Rus came to the Caspian Sea from the Black Sea, over the Sea of Azov, the Don, and the Volga, and the starting point for mentioned campaigns should be considered the Middle Dnipro region, where not later than the early 10thcentury the center of princely power appeared in Kyiv. There is no direct link between those actions and the Rus-Byzantine treaties, and the enemies of the Rus in the region were more often Muslim rulers who were not in direct confrontation with Constantinople or could act as potential allies of the Byzantine Empire. The first campaign of the Rus was directed against Hasan ibn Zayd, the Shiite ruler of Tabaristan. The latter acted against the caliphs of Baghdad, having captured terraria through which the paths of Rus merchants passed. Expeditions of 909/910 and 910/911 years caused the clashes between the Rus and the forces of the Samanid emirs in Tabaristan. We cannot say for sure whether those attacks were politically motivated, but they were stopped after mending differences between Khazaria and the Central Asian emirs. ; У статті досліджуються дискусійні питання стосовно обставин перших походів русів на Каспій (між 864-883, 909/910 і 910/911), відомих за свідченнями ібн Ісфандійара, Амулі та Мар'аши. Окрема увага приділяється місцю цих військових акцій у русько-хазарських відносинах, їх впливу на міжнародні відносини у регіоні навколо Каспійського моря. Автор розглядає шляхи, якими руси потрапляли до мусульманського світу, і пропонує власну версію маршруту руських контингентів. Відмічається зв'язок розглянутих походів з військовою акцією русів, що відбулась між 913 і 917рр., відомою за описом аль-Масуді.

The debatable aspects of the eastern policy of Kyivan Rus during the reign of Prince Sviatoslav (964-972) are studied in the paper. Particular attention is paid to the campaigns of Rus troops against the Khazar Khaganate. The quantity of Sviatoslav's eastern campaigns, the complement of their participants, the influence of Byzantine diplomacy on their organization, evidence of sources on the geography of military operations, and a role played by the Dnipro-Buh estuary as a strategic point on the Rus' waterway to the Caspian Sea are considered. Analysis of written sources and the international context of the eastern policy of Prince Sviatoslav of Kyiv makes it possible to state that the military operations of Rus troops against Khazaria can be combined into two campaigns that are of 965 and 968-969. The route of those campaigns passed along the ancient waterway, which connected the Middle Dnipro region with the Caspian Sea. Waypoints of that route can be considered being the Dnipro trade route, the Black and Azov Seas, the Don and Volga rivers. An important place on this route was taken by the Dnipro-Buh estuary and its coast, in particular the island of St.Epheria (Berezan) and the Biloberezhzhia. It was there that Sviatoslav's troops made a stop for rest and re-equipment of ships for seafaring. Probably, in 965, Sviatoslav's allies were "a large group of Turks." The latter could be recognized as a combined contingent of Oghuz and Pechenegs or detachments of one of those tribes. The campaign of 965 could enjoy the support of Byzantium, which during the 10th century considered Khazaria its competitor in the struggle for influence in the region. ; У статті досліджуються дискусійні аспекти східної політики Київської Русі часів правління князя Святослава (964-972). Особлива увага приділяється походам руських військ проти Хазарського каганату. Розглядаються питання про кількість східних походів Святослава, склад їх учасників, вплив візантійської дипломатії на їх організацію, свідчення джерел стосовно географії військових дій і ролі, що відігравав регіон Дніпровсько-Бузького лиману, як сполучна ланка на водному шляху русів до Каспійського моря. Аналіз письмових джерел і міжнародного контексту східної політики київського князя Святослава дозволяє стверджувати, що дії руських загонів проти Хазарії можна поєднати у два походи – 965 і 968-969 років. Маршрут цих походів проходив давньою водною комунікацією, що поєднувала Середнє Подніпров'я з Каспійським морем. Складовими цього маршруту можна вважати Дніпровський шлях, Чорне та Азовське море, річки Дон і Волгу. Важливе місце на цьому маршруті відігравав Дніпровсько-Бузький лиман і його узбережжя, зокрема о.Св.Еферія (Березань) і Білобережжя. Саме тут загони Святослава робили зупинку для відпочинку та переобладнання суден перед морським плаванням. Вірогідно, у 965р. союзниками Святослава виступала «велика група тюрків». В останніх можна бачити як об'єднані контингенти огузів і печенігів, так і загони одного з цих племен. Похід 965р. міг користуватись і підтримкою Візантії, яка протягом Хст. розглядала Хазарію власним конкурентом у боротьбі за вплив у регіоні.

The paper presents an attempt to reconstruct the battle between the Russian brig «Mercury» and the Turkish warships on May14, 1829, during the Russian-Turkish War of 1828-1829. The material contains a historiographical review of pre-revolutionary, Soviet, contemporary Russian and foreign scientific literature, devoted to this problem. The authors conclude that Russian historiography devoted to the problem is characterized by the complete lack of any digital data on the position of ships during the fight, the characteristics of their weapons, etc. Another its disadvantage is the lack of references to Turkish sources or to the works of Turkish researchers. The only source from the Turkish side is the so-called the «Letter of the Turkish Navigator» from the newspaper «L'Impartial de Smyrne». The authors for the first time introduce the material of this newspaper, which refers to the fight. It is proved that the «Letter of the Turkish Navigator», mentioned in the vast majority of Russian-language works devoted to the problem, has nothing in common with the original. The paper contains the specifications of the ships that participated in the fight. These numerical data make it clear that a small ship like a Russian brig was not able to cause such damages on Turkish battleships that would have forced them to leave the battle. Moreover, there was no ship named «Real-Bey» in the Turkish fleet at the time of the fight. The authors come to the conclusion that «heroization» of the brig «Mercury» fight was needed for the General Headquarters of the Black Sea Fleet to reduce the negative response of the tsarist government to the surrender of the frigate «Raphael» to the Turks, which occurred the previous day. Analyzing the available sources, the authors are considering the version, according to which the brig fight took place not on May14, 1829, but a few days earlier, the day when the Russian frigate «Raphael» surrendered. Heroization of the brig «Mercury» fight was not something extraordinary. To confirm this, the authors give the examples of other similar cases in the history of the Russian Navy. Analyzing available sources, specifications of the ships, the authors debunk the generally accepted version of the fight. The proposed numerical data and the given facts confirm the fact that the real events of May14, 1829, had nothing to do with the generally accepted version of the events. ; У статті представлено спробу реконструкції бою, що стався між російським бригом «Меркурій» і турецькими лінійними кораблями 14травня 1829р. під час російсько-турецької війни 1828-1829рр. Базуючись на технічних характеристиках кораблів-учасників бою, документах, спогадах сучасників події та нових джерелах, автори розвінчують загальноприйняту версію конфлікту, що була прикладом героїзації російської військово-морської історії. Запропоновані числові дані, наведені факти підтверджують непоодинокий характер таких випадків.

The aim of the article is to determine the legal foundations. The methodological basis of the study is analysis and synthesis, systems approach, genetic and comparative methods. Conclusions: The Byzantine law can be traced to the legislation of Basil I and Leo VI. However, jus gentium (law of nations) did not have sufficient representation in their codes. Therefore, the legal basis of Byzantine foreign policy consisted of customs and traditions that had been formed in diplomatic practice in ancient times.The system of international relations of Byzantium was hierarchical. The legal status of each participant in this system was determined by military power, political potential, tradition and religious identity. The relations between Byzantine and Kievan Rus' can serve as a model of the application of international legal norms, which were based on the treaty of 944, which regulated the legal status of merchants, property rights, mutual military assistance and the use of territories on the coast of the Dnieper River estuary, Beloberezhye and the island of Saint Epherius (Berezan).